On Wed, 8 May 2024 21:40:44 +0200
Jakub Jelinek <[email protected]> wrote:
> Perhaps you don't link cobol1 with the correct make variables
> as other FEs are linked?
First, thank you for the careful answer. It allowed me to trace
through the machinery. And I confirmed that it works, usually.
The Make-lang.in for the cobol1 compiler was modelled on the one for
fortran and, indeed, it's usually built statically linked to libstdc++:
$ g++ -no-pie -g3 -DIN_GCC -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables [...] -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -no-pie
-static-libstdc++ -static-libgcc attribs.o -o cobol1 [...]
As we would expect, ldd(1) reports that output is not linked to libstdc+
+.so.
Where things appear to go awry is when I try to take a shortcut:
$ make -C build install
where "build" is the top of the gcc build tree, where we'll eventually
find build/gcc/cobol1. When done that way, cobol1 sometimes ends up
dependent on libstdc++.so.
I haven't tried to find out why that is, whether it's something we're
doing, or something more general. It does seem like more gets built
than needs to be when I do that. <shrug>
For now, at least I understand what the expected outcome is. The
compiler should be statically linked to the C++ library. When it's
not, something went wrong.
--jkl
